IRFAN Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) With consent heard finally.

(2.) It is the submission of learned counsel for the applicant that false case has been registered against the applicant and he is suffering confinement since 13.09.2019 on false pretext. Applicant is employee of husband of prosecutrix and therefore, falsely implicated. No ingredients of Sections 498-A , 377 , 376(2)(N) , 376-D , 328 , 354-C , 323 , 109 of IPC are attributable over the applicant. Only allegation tried to be leveled in the FIR is in respect of Section 376 of IPC that too is a presumption of complainant that applicant made physical contact with her during her inebriated state. Complainant has domestic dispute with her husband and family members and, therefore, proceeding under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. are being going on. It is the allegation that the complainant is involved in flesh trade and recently caught red handed in a hotel at Dabra, Gwalior. He undertakes to cooperate in trial, would make himself available on the dates fixed by the trial Court. He further undertakes that he would not move in the vicinity of the complainant party and would not be source of embarrassment and harassment to the complainant party. Learned counsel further submits that the applicant intends to perform some community service, therefore, he prayed for grant of bail.

(3.) Learned Public Prosecutor for the respondent-State opposed the prayer and prayed for dismissal of the application.